Since the appearance of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions in 1970, Thomas Kuhn's notion of a paradigm has been widely used in the social sciences even though its author was not sure about its applicability outside the hard sciences of nature. In the field of public administration and management, the approach known as 'New Public Management' (NPM) has been seen by many as the new paradigm that is replacing the classic bureaucratic or Weberian paradigm of 'public administration' (PA). However, there has been little reflection concerning the validity of using in this way the notion as it was developed by Thomas Kuhn.The question of whether or not NPM is a new paradigm merits attention for a number of reasons. First, does the introduction of ideas borrowed from business management and economics constitute a fruitful transfer or borrowing (Kuhn, 1970: 29) or a spurious one (Bendor, 1976;Ramos, 1978)? Second, the question of paradigms leads us to reflect on the degree of difference between the supposed new paradigm of NPM and the old one of PA. Is it a revolution that challenges the former paradigm and ultimately leads to its replacement? Finally, inquiring into paradigms informs us of the nature of knowledge in NPM and by extension PA.Here we enter into the realm of epistemology and raise a more universal question about social science: Are we really taking part in a 'conversation that is aware of itself ' (McSwite, 1997: 4)?In what follows Kuhn's theory is recalled, NPM is presented and analyzed in terms of it. In a third section NPM and PA are compared before an overall assessment is attempted in the conclusion. While we claim universality for our theoretical content, the practical difficulties cited, with which the traditional PA paradigm met, are mostly Canadian. Kuhn's theory of paradigms and its application to the social sciencesKuhn's theory was inspired by the desire to put order into the study of the external conditions giving rise to scientific discoveries. What emerged was a
This article presents the results of 15 case studies on administrative innovation by the federal and provincial governments of Canada. The results show that the provinces, particularly Ontario, have recently challenged the federal government's traditional role as mentor in administrative affairs. More important is the process by which diffusion and innovation occur: It is a multitrack sociopolitical process in which ideas play an independent role. Although the majority of cases have their origins in some form of politics, the latter does not drive out problem solving.
This article reflects on the observation that no one group -practitioners, academics, or clients -can claim to possess the full truth on any question in public administration (PA). PA is enriched and afflicted by its practical nature; its students try to persuade colleagues and political and administrative elites of the truth of their findings. Most PA literature presents propositions as logical means to reach desired ends, but disagreement is possible and likely over means and ends. Beyond disagreements on values, many disciplines relevant to PA also ensure differing perspectives. We argue for varied methodologies that recognize stakeholder interests and which minimize methods of persuasion promising too much and ignoring important problems.
A survey of Canada’s top public servants was used to test the effects on them of the agency version of the public service bargain held by the Conservative government of Stephen Harper (2006–2015). Most results were as expected: increasing politicization and prime ministerial influence added much complexity to the deputy minister’s job; and ministers’ political staffers acted as guardians of the agency bargain. However, the survey led to the observation of a decline in ministers’ powers and to the surprising increase of the parliamentary accountability of deputy ministers, as well as to some challenge to the concept of public service bargains. Points for practitioners It is a good idea to consider what the main components of the public service bargain are in any public workplace, that is, what expectations exist about duties, competencies, criteria of evaluation, rewards, and discipline for permanent employees and political staffers. Too strong an agency bargain creates confusion about responsibilities, accountability, and a culture of risk avoidance. Staffers should not disrupt the chain of command and should treat public servants with respect and courtesy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.